"...she had an international portfolio as first lady."

This statement as presentational evidence of Clinton as qualified to be SoS lies at the heart of dissent coming from what Ms. Walsh labels "Clinton haters." This is a weak argument as there is nothing in that "portfolio" that supports strength of diplomacy. If there were, the Clinton campaign would have pounded it over Obama's head during the primary.

Ms. Walsh's premise of trusting Obama in his judgment of selection of Clinton is flawed because it assumes Obama's judgment is flawless. While true he ran a tight-ship campaign, he was not without error (who amongst us would argue he should have held onto Rev. Wright longer)?

Obama's judgment, ironically, might similarly be called into question should he name Clinton SoS, given the lack of managerial skills exhibited during her primary campaign.

A question Ms. Walsh lets slide is: just why are there so many "Clinton haters?" First, I would rephrase that into the more accurate and less inflammatory "Clinton detractors."

Ms. Walsh had demonstrated an unyielding support for Clinton throughout the primary, not exclusively on her candidate's strengths but also on her opponent's weaknesses. For her to now support Clinton based on Obama's strength of judgment is disingenuously slanted to support her bias.

I would buy your argument that Clinton's campaign managers are at fault for her failure, if only Clinton had stuck to the voice that she most famously found after NH and fired Mr. Penn before she was forced to. The responsibility for a campaign's direction and its success or failure ultimately rests with the person responsible for signing off on the strategic and tactical procedures presented by his or her strategists. You cannot delegate ultimate success or assign blame to the handlers, as this is simply another obfuscation to exonerate the candidate, in this case Clinton, for her kitchen-sink (their term) unguided judgment and lack of cohesive campaign identity.

The author tells Obama supporters that our next president "has displayed the very character and maturity that they always attributed to him" in choosing Hillary as Sec. of State.

The author conveniently forgets that Clinton supporters attacked his character (Wright/Ayers) and maturity ("naive")and now he switches sides to make his biased argument in a transparent Republican tactic.

If you are looking for a substantive approach to the depiction of prostitution the film "Klute" (1971-Alan J. Pakula) offers an uncompromising look into the layered psychology of the hooker by writers Andy Lewis and David P. Lewis without being pedantic. Jane Fonda won an Oscar for her portrayal of Bree Daniels, playing off of Donald Sutherland's private investigator John Klute. No annoying SATC-type, subtext-revealing voice-overs here to make it easy on the audience; the filmmaker makes you (and the actors) work for it.